超级军网凌乱了——英国国家气象局说地球不变暖了
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/04/29 17:47:02
加拿大《国家邮报》龙腾
标题：Global warming hasn’t stopped, but it has stalled, says new prediction
from British national weather service
从英国国家气象局新的预测说全球变暖一直没有停止过，但是却止步
不前
链接：http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/08/global-warming-hasnt-stopped-but-it-has-stalled-says-new-prediction-from-british-national-weather-service/
Global warming has stalled and will not raise world temperatures over the next
five years, according to a new prediction from the British national weather
service.
英国国家气象局一个新的预测说全球气候变暖现象已经停止了，世界温度在未来的五年内也不会再上升。
The updated computer model of the planet’s climate lowers by about 20% an
earlier prediction of how much hotter the coming few years will be than the long-
term average since 1971.
The new prediction “does not necessarily tell us anything about long-term
predictions of climate change,” the Met Office said in a statement, and it is
“actively researching potential causes of the recent slowdown in global warming,
including natural variability.”
“I suspect a lot of modelling groups are going to have to start revising their
forecasts down, because most of them are running too hot,” said Ross McKitrick,
a University of Guelph economist who was instrumental in debunking the famous
“hockey stick” graph of rising global temperatures. “There are so many models
that are now so far off that it suggests a wider problem with the technique.”
一个新的地球气候计算机模型显示未来几年温度上升会比之前预测的低20%，保持自1971年以来的平均水平。
气象局在声明中说新的预测“不会确切的告诉我们有关长期气候变化的预测，这是对最近全球变暖减慢原因积极研究，包括自然变化。”
“我怀疑很多研究机构将不得不修改他们的预测，因为他们大多数倾向于升
温。到目前为止有许多的典型表明技术问题。”揭穿著名的“曲棍球棒”全球气
候上升图的圭尔夫大学经济学家罗斯麦克特里克说。
--------------------------------------
Over the next five years, “global average temperature is expected to remain
between 0.28 degrees celsius and 0.59 degrees celsius above the long-term
(1971-2000) average … with values most likely to be about 0.43 degrees celsius
higher than average,” reads the new Met Office report. A previous prediction said they would be 0.54 degrees higher.
Likewise, the Met Office’s earlier prediction that “about half” of the years 2010 to 2019 will be warmer than 1998 (which was the warmest year since records werekept, at 0.40 degrees above average) is now unlikely under the new model.
“It’s like Keynesian economic models in the 1970s that kept predicting high
inflation would bring down unemployment,” Prof. McKitrick said. “Eventually they
were so far off reality that it was no longer a case of trying to fine tune bits that didn’t fit, economists had to admit the underlying theory was wrong and start
over.”
在接下来的5年里，全球平均气温将上升0.28摄氏度到0.59摄氏度间，低于1971年至2000年的平均值，最可能的是约为0.43摄氏度。气象局的报告说之前的预测是0.54摄氏度。
同样，气象局的早期预测说的2010年到2019年约有一半时间比1998年热的现象在新的气候模拟中不太可能。（1998年是有史以来最暖的一年，比往年平均水平高0.4摄氏度。）
”这就像凯恩斯经济模型在70年代预测高通胀会降低失业率，最后他们发现它和现实不符，经济学家承认他们一开始的经济理论是错误的。”麦基特里
克说。
----------------
The downgraded prediction recalls the 2006 report by the British government that
pegged the economic cost of climate change at 20% of global GDP each year
“now and forever,” but was criticized for relying too heavily on extreme and
unlikely outcomes, and is now outdated after the global economic downturn.
“This does not mean that there is no man-made global warming,” said Bjorn
Lomborg, a Danish academic and author of The Skeptical Environmentalist. “But it
does mean that we perhaps should not be quite as scared as some people might
have been from the mid ’70s to about 2000, when temperatures rose
dramatically, because they were probably at least partially rising dramatically
because of natural variation, just like they are now stalling because of natural
variation.”
He called the revised prediction “a
return to the humility that we probably should
have had right from the start,” and a
reminder that the climate is harder to
predict
than scientists once “naively” thought.
“the short-term prediction has always been dodgy. It’s really hard to say what’s
going to happen in five years. Global warming is about what’s going to happen in
20 or 50 or 100 years,” Mr. Lomborg said.
Andrew Weaver, Canada Research Chair in climate modelling at the University of
Victoria, and a B.C. Green Party candidate, called it a “highly uncertain” prediction
from the fledgling science of short-term, “decadal” forecasting of the climate,
which is an inherently chaotic and unpredictable system.
“Typically, science evolves so that you get better at what you do. But predictions
can also change just as a matter of chance,” he said.
“Decadal predictability today is kind of what seasonal predictability was 15 years
ago. Now we routinely look at El Nino forecasts, we routinely look at seasonal
forecasts, and they’re very good, but that’s because we’ve been doing them for
about 15 or 20 years now. Decadal predictability is only just starting, so it’s a bit
all over the place. The Met Office actually have changed their prediction … other
groups might get still different predictions,” Prof. Weaver said.
2006年英国政府报告说全球每年20%的成本用于维持经济，被批评为过分极
端，和现实不符，是过时的全球经济衰退说法。
“这并不意味这没有人为使全球变暖，”丹麦学者，环保主义者比约恩.隆伯格
说，“但这确实告诉我们不要对70年代中期到2000年间气温上升太紧张，因
为它可能是由偶尔的自然变化引起的戏剧性上升，就像现在因自然变化引起
的减缓一样。
他呼吁修改预测，“也许一开始我们就应该谦虚点，”他还提醒，气候变化比
科学家的奇思怪想还难理解。
“短期预测一直是骗人的，真的很难说未来5年会发生点什么，在20年50年或
100年全球气候会有什么变化。”隆伯格先生说。
安德烈，加拿大维多利亚大学气象模拟专家，前绿党候选人称短期预测高度
不确定，年际气候是一个复杂不可预测的问题。
“科技使你更好的工作，但是预测通常有不确定因素。”他说。
“15年前预测现在的周期性变化，如今我们经常看到对尼诺现象迷惑的预测
，我们发现大多数周期性预测都成立，但那是因为我们在过去15或20年里
我们做了大量修正。未来十年的预测刚刚进行，这时完全不一样的。气象局
实际已经改变了他们的预测，其他研究或许会得到不同结果。”薇芙教授说
。
-----------------------
Bruce Pardy, a professor of environmental law at Queen’s University, said such
predictions are especially dangerous because the common understanding of
climate change remains simplistic on all sides. He cited the impulse to blame
Hurricane Sandy on global warming as an example of wrong-headed thinking.
“In an ideal world, the policy that’s put in place should not be designed to change
what’s going to happen in the short term. But the game that everybody is playing
is to emphasize short-term things so as to produce pressure in the direction they
prefer,” he said.
“It all depends upon your policy
preference, and frankly a lot of policy
preferences
exist before the data.”
奎恩大学环境法教授布鲁斯帕蒂说这
样的预言是危险的，他引用认为全球变
暖带来飓风的研究作为例子说这是一种
错误的思维。
“在假想里，这种努力不会改变什么，
大家不过是喜欢玩一个什么会引起改
变的游戏”，他说 。
“这一切都取决于你的偏好，实际上，
偏好对以前的研究数据有影响。”
-----------------------------
加拿大《国家邮报》龙腾
标题：Global warming hasn’t stopped, but it has stalled, says new prediction
from British national weather service
从英国国家气象局新的预测说全球变暖一直没有停止过，但是却止步
不前
链接：http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/08/global-warming-hasnt-stopped-but-it-has-stalled-says-new-prediction-from-british-national-weather-service/
Global warming has stalled and will not raise world temperatures over the next
five years, according to a new prediction from the British national weather
service.
英国国家气象局一个新的预测说全球气候变暖现象已经停止了，世界温度在未来的五年内也不会再上升。
The updated computer model of the planet’s climate lowers by about 20% an
earlier prediction of how much hotter the coming few years will be than the long-
term average since 1971.
The new prediction “does not necessarily tell us anything about long-term
predictions of climate change,” the Met Office said in a statement, and it is
“actively researching potential causes of the recent slowdown in global warming,
including natural variability.”
“I suspect a lot of modelling groups are going to have to start revising their
forecasts down, because most of them are running too hot,” said Ross McKitrick,
a University of Guelph economist who was instrumental in debunking the famous
“hockey stick” graph of rising global temperatures. “There are so many models
that are now so far off that it suggests a wider problem with the technique.”
一个新的地球气候计算机模型显示未来几年温度上升会比之前预测的低20%，保持自1971年以来的平均水平。
气象局在声明中说新的预测“不会确切的告诉我们有关长期气候变化的预测，这是对最近全球变暖减慢原因积极研究，包括自然变化。”
“我怀疑很多研究机构将不得不修改他们的预测，因为他们大多数倾向于升
温。到目前为止有许多的典型表明技术问题。”揭穿著名的“曲棍球棒”全球气
候上升图的圭尔夫大学经济学家罗斯麦克特里克说。
--------------------------------------
Over the next five years, “global average temperature is expected to remain
between 0.28 degrees celsius and 0.59 degrees celsius above the long-term
(1971-2000) average … with values most likely to be about 0.43 degrees celsius
higher than average,” reads the new Met Office report. A previous prediction said they would be 0.54 degrees higher.
Likewise, the Met Office’s earlier prediction that “about half” of the years 2010 to 2019 will be warmer than 1998 (which was the warmest year since records werekept, at 0.40 degrees above average) is now unlikely under the new model.
“It’s like Keynesian economic models in the 1970s that kept predicting high
inflation would bring down unemployment,” Prof. McKitrick said. “Eventually they
were so far off reality that it was no longer a case of trying to fine tune bits that didn’t fit, economists had to admit the underlying theory was wrong and start
over.”
在接下来的5年里，全球平均气温将上升0.28摄氏度到0.59摄氏度间，低于1971年至2000年的平均值，最可能的是约为0.43摄氏度。气象局的报告说之前的预测是0.54摄氏度。
同样，气象局的早期预测说的2010年到2019年约有一半时间比1998年热的现象在新的气候模拟中不太可能。（1998年是有史以来最暖的一年，比往年平均水平高0.4摄氏度。）
”这就像凯恩斯经济模型在70年代预测高通胀会降低失业率，最后他们发现它和现实不符，经济学家承认他们一开始的经济理论是错误的。”麦基特里
克说。
----------------
The downgraded prediction recalls the 2006 report by the British government that
pegged the economic cost of climate change at 20% of global GDP each year
“now and forever,” but was criticized for relying too heavily on extreme and
unlikely outcomes, and is now outdated after the global economic downturn.
“This does not mean that there is no man-made global warming,” said Bjorn
Lomborg, a Danish academic and author of The Skeptical Environmentalist. “But it
does mean that we perhaps should not be quite as scared as some people might
have been from the mid ’70s to about 2000, when temperatures rose
dramatically, because they were probably at least partially rising dramatically
because of natural variation, just like they are now stalling because of natural
variation.”
He called the revised prediction “a
return to the humility that we probably should
have had right from the start,” and a
reminder that the climate is harder to
predict
than scientists once “naively” thought.
“the short-term prediction has always been dodgy. It’s really hard to say what’s
going to happen in five years. Global warming is about what’s going to happen in
20 or 50 or 100 years,” Mr. Lomborg said.
Andrew Weaver, Canada Research Chair in climate modelling at the University of
Victoria, and a B.C. Green Party candidate, called it a “highly uncertain” prediction
from the fledgling science of short-term, “decadal” forecasting of the climate,
which is an inherently chaotic and unpredictable system.
“Typically, science evolves so that you get better at what you do. But predictions
can also change just as a matter of chance,” he said.
“Decadal predictability today is kind of what seasonal predictability was 15 years
ago. Now we routinely look at El Nino forecasts, we routinely look at seasonal
forecasts, and they’re very good, but that’s because we’ve been doing them for
about 15 or 20 years now. Decadal predictability is only just starting, so it’s a bit
all over the place. The Met Office actually have changed their prediction … other
groups might get still different predictions,” Prof. Weaver said.
2006年英国政府报告说全球每年20%的成本用于维持经济，被批评为过分极
端，和现实不符，是过时的全球经济衰退说法。
“这并不意味这没有人为使全球变暖，”丹麦学者，环保主义者比约恩.隆伯格
说，“但这确实告诉我们不要对70年代中期到2000年间气温上升太紧张，因
为它可能是由偶尔的自然变化引起的戏剧性上升，就像现在因自然变化引起
的减缓一样。
他呼吁修改预测，“也许一开始我们就应该谦虚点，”他还提醒，气候变化比
科学家的奇思怪想还难理解。
“短期预测一直是骗人的，真的很难说未来5年会发生点什么，在20年50年或
100年全球气候会有什么变化。”隆伯格先生说。
安德烈，加拿大维多利亚大学气象模拟专家，前绿党候选人称短期预测高度
不确定，年际气候是一个复杂不可预测的问题。
“科技使你更好的工作，但是预测通常有不确定因素。”他说。
“15年前预测现在的周期性变化，如今我们经常看到对尼诺现象迷惑的预测
，我们发现大多数周期性预测都成立，但那是因为我们在过去15或20年里
我们做了大量修正。未来十年的预测刚刚进行，这时完全不一样的。气象局
实际已经改变了他们的预测，其他研究或许会得到不同结果。”薇芙教授说
。
-----------------------
Bruce Pardy, a professor of environmental law at Queen’s University, said such
predictions are especially dangerous because the common understanding of
climate change remains simplistic on all sides. He cited the impulse to blame
Hurricane Sandy on global warming as an example of wrong-headed thinking.
“In an ideal world, the policy that’s put in place should not be designed to change
what’s going to happen in the short term. But the game that everybody is playing
is to emphasize short-term things so as to produce pressure in the direction they
prefer,” he said.
“It all depends upon your policy
preference, and frankly a lot of policy
preferences
exist before the data.”
奎恩大学环境法教授布鲁斯帕蒂说这
样的预言是危险的，他引用认为全球变
暖带来飓风的研究作为例子说这是一种
错误的思维。
“在假想里，这种努力不会改变什么，
大家不过是喜欢玩一个什么会引起改
变的游戏”，他说 。
“这一切都取决于你的偏好，实际上，
偏好对以前的研究数据有影响。”
-----------------------------
评论
J Villain
This is the money quote from the article.
"He called the revised prediction “a return to the humility that we
probably should have had right from the start,” and a reminder that the
climate is harder to predict than scientists once “naively” thought."
写文章赚钱。
“他说要一开始就谦虚点并修正预测并提醒预测气候变化比理解科学家的奇
思怪想还难。”
---------
nickstarski
We can't pull off our globe-trotting "carbon credit" scam.
Even with Al Bore of Nobel fame and Billy Clinton in our corner
我们不能解决遍及全球的“碳排放信用”骗局。
即使周围都是诺贝尔奖得主和比尔克林顿。
------------
Perhaps not. But Ol' Al did manage to eke out another $100 million by selling his
lefty environmentalist TV network to... oil-sheik owned Al Jazeera.
也许不会。但醇燃料支持者会设法把他们左翼环保电视网络开价100亿美元
卖给拥有半岛电视台的阿拉伯石油酋长。
-------------------
mtrueman
Don't be too hasty in writing off the validity of global warming. The Met statement
is here:
They state right at the start:
"The latest decadal prediction suggests
that global temperatures over the next five years are likely to be a
little lower than predicted from the previous prediction issued in
December 2011.
However, both versions are consistent in
predicting that we will continue to see near-record levels of global
temperatures in the next few years.
This means temperatures will
remain well above the long-term average and we will continue to see
temperatures like those which resulted in 2000-2009 being the warmest
decade in the instrumental record dating back to 1850."
Those quoted in the article are an economist and lawyer from Canadian
universities and a Danish writer. None of them have the expertise of the scientists
at the Met, and they are in no position to refute the crux of the message put out
here. The Met is predicting a rise in temperature of 0.43 C over the next five years
revised from 0.54 C. This is not the end of global warming, or a return to humility,
just the refinement of the modelling scientists are using.
别急着给全球变暖下结论，2011年12月他们说最新的预测认为未来5年全球
气温可能略低于之前的预测。又说我们在未来几年可能看到接近于历史最高
记录的全球平均气温。这不一回事吗？这意味着未来几年气温还是远高于长
期平均水平，我们会看到自1850年以来最高气温。这里面引用的文章作者
是经济学家吗，加拿大的律师，丹麦的作家，没有专门的气象学家的研究数
据，这些人没有立场，看不到关键信息，预测未来五年温度上升从0.54度改
为0.43度不代表全球变暖的结束，或客观点。使用了更完善的科学模拟研究
而已。
---------------
sethdayal
More like this infomercial brought to you by our sponsor. Here's our update from
our friends at Big Oil.
这种文章会带来赞助商。咱们的朋友大石油公司的修正报告来了。
----------------------
Rationalist1
Most people gave us making fun of people's names when they stopped playing on
the playground. I guess you're not most people.
大多数人玩耍的时候取笑他人名字为乐，我猜你不在其中。
-------------------------
ChristineLalonde
The Global Warming scam is nothing more than a wealth transfer scheme
laundered through the UN.
全球变暖只是个通过联合国方案转移财富的骗局。
--------------------------
TheBeaver
Probably the biggest scam of all time thanks to the corrupt UN and Al Gorezeera.
也许是有史以来最大的骗局，感谢联合国和Al Gorezeera。
---------------------------
DSB111
Having worked with computer 'models' its all how you set it up. I remain very
skeptical of 'predictions' that can't be verified. A model has to prove that it can
predict outcomes before its accepted as a good tool.
However, you don't need a Ph.D. in math to see with your own eyes; that the polar
ice is melting away. Is it man-made or natural?
who knows. There's No way to separate natural warming from proposed
greenhouse gas warming and know which is the driving force.
But the people who deny its not getting hotter are the real phonies.
They 'want' it not to be so, so they abandon their own observations for their
superstitious fantasies about conspiracies.
使用计算机模拟系统时你要怎么去设置它?我还是怀疑预测无法验证。一种
新模型向被大家接受得先证明自己确实有预测能力。极地冰川融化，是天灾
还是人祸？天晓得，又没有办法把温室气体导致气温上升和地球自然变化引
起的分开来，研究这个才是动力。但是谁也无法否认自己越来越像个骗子，
他们想要的并非如此，所以他们为阴谋放弃了自己的观点。
--------------------------
Anopheles
I have worked with computer models of natural systems for a very long time.
Despite these models being "verified"
and widely used and accepted, I can
make
the results say pretty much anything I
want by varying input parameters,. And the
results easily pass peer reviews.
我曾经干过一段时间用计算机模拟自然
环境，尽管这些系统通过验证被广发
使用和接受，我可以说我能通过改变输
入参数得到任何我想得到的结果，而
且很容易通过同行的评审。
---------------------------
DSB111
That's my point.
So you need to simply 'observe' what's happening to the polar ice sheet. Its
melting.
We can't be sure about the cause, but we'd better prepare for higher sea-levels.
我想说的是，你需要简单地观察一下极低冰盖发生了什么，以及它的熔点，
我们不能肯定原因，不过还是赶紧造船吧。
------------------------
anon173259700
You believe the melting of the Arctic ice sheet will raise sea levels? really? Um
that ice is displacing the water and when it melts the displacement end ergo NO
rise
你相信北极冰盖融化会提高海平面？真的吗?冰也是水，它融化之后还不是
那么个样子。
----------------------
BrownGuy99
He meant Antarctica I'm sure. Its a common mistake.
"The main ice covered landmass is Antarctica at the South Pole, with about 90
percent of the world's ice (and 70 percent of its fresh water). Antarctica is
covered with ice an average of 2,133 meters (7,000 feet) thick. If all of the
Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters
(200 feet). But the average temperature in Antarctica is -37°C, so the ice there is
in no danger of melting. In fact in most parts of the continent it never gets above
freezing.
There is a significant amount of ice covering Greenland, which would add another
7 meters (20 feet) to the oceans if it melted. Because Greenland is closer to the
equator than Antarctica, the temperatures there are higher, so the ice is more
likely to melt."
他说的是南极洲，我确信。一个常识错误。
主要的冰层覆盖在南极洲大陆，大约世界上百分之九十的冰，也就是70%的
淡水，南极冰盖平均有2133米厚，如果全部融化，全球海平面将升高61米
，但是南极大陆大部分地方的平均温度是零下37度，所以那里的冰川没有融
化的危险。格陵兰岛的冰川全部融化的话会使海平面上升7米，由于格陵兰
比南极更靠近赤道，温度更高，更容易融化。
------------------------------
anon173259700
es and the Antarctic is cooling and growing more ice ergo no sea level rise to
worry about.
es和南极越来越冷，冰层越来越厚，不用担心海平面上升。
---------------------
zeeman1
Don't you know why it's called Greenland?
你知不知道为啥叫那格陵兰岛？
-------------------------------
BrownGuy99
Do you really think that I think its a complete solid block of ice?
"The Greenland ice sheet (Kalaallisut: Sermersuaq) is a vast body of ice covering
1,710,000 square kilometres (660,235 sq mi), roughly 80% of the surface of
Greenland. It is the second largest ice body in the world, after the Antarctic Ice
Sheet."
你真的以为我认为那是个完整的大冰块？格陵兰冰盖有171万平方公里，占
了格陵兰岛80%的面积，是除南极冰盖世界上最大的冰川。
-------------------------
ASchort
It's the glaciers melting and ocean warming that are causing ocean levels to rise.
Melting sea ice is simply a confirmation of global warming.
冰川融化和海洋变暖导致海平面上升，融化的冰山很简单的证实了全球变暖
。
-------------------------------
DSB111
The portion of the ice that is 'above' the surface melts and raises the overall level
of liquid.
海平面以上的冰融化导致海平面上升。
-----------------------------
anon173259700
Really, that is what you believe. time to go back to school my friend. I suggest you
go learn some basic hydrology, physics of displacement and then come back
here. Wow.
真的，你信那些，回学校改造改造吧我的朋友，建议你学点冰和水物理转变
原理再回到这里来，真的。
--------------------------
DSB111
Please explain yourself.
你自己解释解释嘛。
-------------------------------
zeeman1
There has been no increase in sea levels anywhere in the world.
目前全世界任何地方的海平面都还没变
化。
评论
J Villain
This is the money quote from the article.
"He called the revised prediction “a return to the humility that we
probably should have had right from the start,” and a reminder that the
climate is harder to predict than scientists once “naively” thought."
写文章赚钱。
“他说要一开始就谦虚点并修正预测并提醒预测气候变化比理解科学家的奇
思怪想还难。”
---------
nickstarski
We can't pull off our globe-trotting "carbon credit" scam.
Even with Al Bore of Nobel fame and Billy Clinton in our corner
我们不能解决遍及全球的“碳排放信用”骗局。
即使周围都是诺贝尔奖得主和比尔克林顿。
------------
Perhaps not. But Ol' Al did manage to eke out another $100 million by selling his
lefty environmentalist TV network to... oil-sheik owned Al Jazeera.
也许不会。但醇燃料支持者会设法把他们左翼环保电视网络开价100亿美元
卖给拥有半岛电视台的阿拉伯石油酋长。
-------------------
mtrueman
Don't be too hasty in writing off the validity of global warming. The Met statement
is here:
They state right at the start:
"The latest decadal prediction suggests
that global temperatures over the next five years are likely to be a
little lower than predicted from the previous prediction issued in
December 2011.
However, both versions are consistent in
predicting that we will continue to see near-record levels of global
temperatures in the next few years.
This means temperatures will
remain well above the long-term average and we will continue to see
temperatures like those which resulted in 2000-2009 being the warmest
decade in the instrumental record dating back to 1850."
Those quoted in the article are an economist and lawyer from Canadian
universities and a Danish writer. None of them have the expertise of the scientists
at the Met, and they are in no position to refute the crux of the message put out
here. The Met is predicting a rise in temperature of 0.43 C over the next five years
revised from 0.54 C. This is not the end of global warming, or a return to humility,
just the refinement of the modelling scientists are using.
别急着给全球变暖下结论，2011年12月他们说最新的预测认为未来5年全球
气温可能略低于之前的预测。又说我们在未来几年可能看到接近于历史最高
记录的全球平均气温。这不一回事吗？这意味着未来几年气温还是远高于长
期平均水平，我们会看到自1850年以来最高气温。这里面引用的文章作者
是经济学家吗，加拿大的律师，丹麦的作家，没有专门的气象学家的研究数
据，这些人没有立场，看不到关键信息，预测未来五年温度上升从0.54度改
为0.43度不代表全球变暖的结束，或客观点。使用了更完善的科学模拟研究
而已。
---------------
sethdayal
More like this infomercial brought to you by our sponsor. Here's our update from
our friends at Big Oil.
这种文章会带来赞助商。咱们的朋友大石油公司的修正报告来了。
----------------------
Rationalist1
Most people gave us making fun of people's names when they stopped playing on
the playground. I guess you're not most people.
大多数人玩耍的时候取笑他人名字为乐，我猜你不在其中。
-------------------------
ChristineLalonde
The Global Warming scam is nothing more than a wealth transfer scheme
laundered through the UN.
全球变暖只是个通过联合国方案转移财富的骗局。
--------------------------
TheBeaver
Probably the biggest scam of all time thanks to the corrupt UN and Al Gorezeera.
也许是有史以来最大的骗局，感谢联合国和Al Gorezeera。
---------------------------
DSB111
Having worked with computer 'models' its all how you set it up. I remain very
skeptical of 'predictions' that can't be verified. A model has to prove that it can
predict outcomes before its accepted as a good tool.
However, you don't need a Ph.D. in math to see with your own eyes; that the polar
ice is melting away. Is it man-made or natural?
who knows. There's No way to separate natural warming from proposed
greenhouse gas warming and know which is the driving force.
But the people who deny its not getting hotter are the real phonies.
They 'want' it not to be so, so they abandon their own observations for their
superstitious fantasies about conspiracies.
使用计算机模拟系统时你要怎么去设置它?我还是怀疑预测无法验证。一种
新模型向被大家接受得先证明自己确实有预测能力。极地冰川融化，是天灾
还是人祸？天晓得，又没有办法把温室气体导致气温上升和地球自然变化引
起的分开来，研究这个才是动力。但是谁也无法否认自己越来越像个骗子，
他们想要的并非如此，所以他们为阴谋放弃了自己的观点。
--------------------------
Anopheles
I have worked with computer models of natural systems for a very long time.
Despite these models being "verified"
and widely used and accepted, I can
make
the results say pretty much anything I
want by varying input parameters,. And the
results easily pass peer reviews.
我曾经干过一段时间用计算机模拟自然
环境，尽管这些系统通过验证被广发
使用和接受，我可以说我能通过改变输
入参数得到任何我想得到的结果，而
且很容易通过同行的评审。
---------------------------
DSB111
That's my point.
So you need to simply 'observe' what's happening to the polar ice sheet. Its
melting.
We can't be sure about the cause, but we'd better prepare for higher sea-levels.
我想说的是，你需要简单地观察一下极低冰盖发生了什么，以及它的熔点，
我们不能肯定原因，不过还是赶紧造船吧。
------------------------
anon173259700
You believe the melting of the Arctic ice sheet will raise sea levels? really? Um
that ice is displacing the water and when it melts the displacement end ergo NO
rise
你相信北极冰盖融化会提高海平面？真的吗?冰也是水，它融化之后还不是
那么个样子。
----------------------
BrownGuy99
He meant Antarctica I'm sure. Its a common mistake.
"The main ice covered landmass is Antarctica at the South Pole, with about 90
percent of the world's ice (and 70 percent of its fresh water). Antarctica is
covered with ice an average of 2,133 meters (7,000 feet) thick. If all of the
Antarctic ice melted, sea levels around the world would rise about 61 meters
(200 feet). But the average temperature in Antarctica is -37°C, so the ice there is
in no danger of melting. In fact in most parts of the continent it never gets above
freezing.
There is a significant amount of ice covering Greenland, which would add another
7 meters (20 feet) to the oceans if it melted. Because Greenland is closer to the
equator than Antarctica, the temperatures there are higher, so the ice is more
likely to melt."
他说的是南极洲，我确信。一个常识错误。
主要的冰层覆盖在南极洲大陆，大约世界上百分之九十的冰，也就是70%的
淡水，南极冰盖平均有2133米厚，如果全部融化，全球海平面将升高61米
，但是南极大陆大部分地方的平均温度是零下37度，所以那里的冰川没有融
化的危险。格陵兰岛的冰川全部融化的话会使海平面上升7米，由于格陵兰
比南极更靠近赤道，温度更高，更容易融化。
------------------------------
anon173259700
es and the Antarctic is cooling and growing more ice ergo no sea level rise to
worry about.
es和南极越来越冷，冰层越来越厚，不用担心海平面上升。
---------------------
zeeman1
Don't you know why it's called Greenland?
你知不知道为啥叫那格陵兰岛？
-------------------------------
BrownGuy99
Do you really think that I think its a complete solid block of ice?
"The Greenland ice sheet (Kalaallisut: Sermersuaq) is a vast body of ice covering
1,710,000 square kilometres (660,235 sq mi), roughly 80% of the surface of
Greenland. It is the second largest ice body in the world, after the Antarctic Ice
Sheet."
你真的以为我认为那是个完整的大冰块？格陵兰冰盖有171万平方公里，占
了格陵兰岛80%的面积，是除南极冰盖世界上最大的冰川。
-------------------------
ASchort
It's the glaciers melting and ocean warming that are causing ocean levels to rise.
Melting sea ice is simply a confirmation of global warming.
冰川融化和海洋变暖导致海平面上升，融化的冰山很简单的证实了全球变暖
。
-------------------------------
DSB111
The portion of the ice that is 'above' the surface melts and raises the overall level
of liquid.
海平面以上的冰融化导致海平面上升。
-----------------------------
anon173259700
Really, that is what you believe. time to go back to school my friend. I suggest you
go learn some basic hydrology, physics of displacement and then come back
here. Wow.
真的，你信那些，回学校改造改造吧我的朋友，建议你学点冰和水物理转变
原理再回到这里来，真的。
--------------------------
DSB111
Please explain yourself.
你自己解释解释嘛。
-------------------------------
zeeman1
There has been no increase in sea levels anywhere in the world.
目前全世界任何地方的海平面都还没变
化。
到底还变不变暖啊？有没有确切的结论？感觉“全球变暖”似乎忽悠的成分居多。
到底还变不变暖啊？有没有确切的结论？感觉“全球变暖”似乎忽悠的成分居多。
BrownGuy99
Right, because you said so.
Here's some info that proves you wrong:
After a period of approximately 2,000 years of little change (not shown here),
global average sea level rose throughout the 20th century, and the rate of change
has accelerated in recent years. 1 When averaged over all the world's oceans,
absolute sea level increased at an average rate of 0.07 inches per year from 1880
to 2011 (see Figure 1). From 1993 to 2011, however, average sea level rose at a
rate of 0.11 to 0.13 inches per year—roughly twice as fast as the long-term trend.
Relative sea level rose along much of the U.S. coastline between 1960 and 2011,
particularly the Mid-Atlantic coast and parts of the Gulf coast, where some
stations registered increases of more than 8 inches (see Figure 2). Meanwhile,
relative sea level fell at some locations in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest. At
those sites, even though absolute sea level has risen, land elevation has risen
more rapidly.
While absolute sea level has increased steadily overall, particularly in recent
decades, regional trends vary, and absolute sea level has decreased in some
places. 2 Relative sea level also has not risen uniformly because of regional and
local changes in land movement and long-term changes in coastal circulation
patterns.
好，既然你贼么说，哥就让你知道你错在哪。
（好长一段，大意是说20世纪之前的两千年里海平面没什么变化，但之后变
化很快）。
----------------------------
zeeman1
Its gone up by a millimeter in some places and down by the same amount in
others.
You win post of the day, bud.
一些地方以毫米级为单位上升，一些地方下降。你赢了，少年。
-----------------------------
BrownGuy99
Thanks for the award. I'm glad you refute my facts with empty opinion.
But either way....
"When averaged over all the world's oceans, absolute sea level increased at an
average rate of 0.07 inches per year from 1880 to 2011 (see Figure 1). From
1993 to 2011, however, average sea level rose at a rate of 0.11 to 0.13 inches
per year—roughly twice as fast as the long-term trend."
Did you miss that critical part of the sentence? Let me re-repost it:
"When averaged over all the world's oceans"
多谢，我很感谢你毫无根据的反驳我说的事实。
但是，（好吧他有图我没图，这个就算了。）
-----------------
werpor
I remember when the last glaciers melted at the end of the last 'ice' age. That
time, god blamed man. I should have listened to Noah!
我记得在上个冰川世纪冰川融化的时候，上帝怪罪于人类，我本该听诺亚的
话的。
--------------------------
BrownGuy99
i don't know what point you're trying to make, or if your post is serious or not....
but don't even think of bringing your crackpot religion into this conversation.
我不知道你向说什么，你工作重要与否，但是别把宗家那玩意扯进来。
----------------
werpor
When the ice caps melted at the end of the last ice age -- mere seconds ago in
geologic time -- the oceans rose three hundred feet. Entire civilizations were
submerged. Every culture reflects this in their 'myth' stories. Noah is the guy in the
Old Testament who supposedly built an arc.
The melting of the ice caps is fact; Noah is the myth. But the Indians here in North
America have a turtles back representing an arc.
Obviously...you do not "know" the point I was making; or understand it either.
One does not have to be the least bit religious, in order to be entirely familiar with
the Bible, or the Mahabharata for that matter. But without knowledge of the Bible
one can never understand the entire western literary canon.
I have Northrop Frye and his early influence on me for that insight. Try his
Anatomy of Criticism.
As to the ice ages and flooding etc. Periodic warming and cooling are great cycle
events...but that is common knowledge. Even the great cycle can be politicized.
I'd also suggest some some reading about the effects of volcanos on the weather
and the climate.
上个冰川世纪时代，冰川融化海面上升了三百英尺，整个世界文明被淹没，
很多文化的神话故事都反映了这个。旧约里认为诺亚建了那条船。
冰川融化是事实，诺亚是神话，但印第安人在北美有个海龟背代表船，很明
显....你”不知道“我刚才说了什么，也不理解。
-----------------------
GottaWonderSomeDays
EPA huh? Now there's a paragon of
scientific virtue. Remember DDT among
others?
环保局啊？现在他们是个有科学道德的典范。记得DDT吗？
记得DDT吗？
--------------------
Michael Cummings
Only ice melting on land will actually create a rise in sea levels, ice melting on the
ocean or water will actually drop sea levels, it's called displacement.
只有地上冰川融化才会造成海平面上升，海洋里的冰融化的话，实际上海平
面会下降，此位移也。
--------------------
Michael Cummings
When was the last time you were up there actually see this for yourself.
嘛时候你自己看过这个？
----------------------
absolutelyboring101
Thank you for your comments. You are so right.
谢谢你的观点，你可真行。
---------------
Bob1957
And sending money to Al Gore will stop this how?
那该停止给Al Gore小钱钱了？
----------------------
DSB111
I never said that.
我可没说过。
----------------------
BrownGuy99
who said anything about sending money to al gore?
谁说要送钱给Al Gore了？
----------------------
Galla Placidia
Separating natural from greenhouse warming. Begin by modelling known natural
warming - i.e. everything prior to the XXth century. Also look to find explanations
for the natural warming (solar activity, for example). Then compare with current
experience. As long as current temperatures are lower than during the Medieval
warming period or the age of the dinosaurs, I am going to be skeptical about man
-made global warming
区别温室效应，首先要模拟已知的自然变暖，也就是二十世纪之前的东西。
希望能找到对例如太阳活动之类自然变暖的解释，我开始怀疑人为全球变暖
了。
-------------------
Icarus62
Climate scientists have done exactly that and found that human activity accounts
for all of the global warming of the last half century.
气象学家已经确认，人类活动在过去的半个世纪是全球变暖的唯一因素。
------------------------
mrbuddhafreak
Actually, no they haven't.
Many of the models, unbelievably, even omit the variables caused by the cycles of
the sun, which believe it or not, is responsible for most of the heating of this
planet (and Mars, which has had similar warming, darn Rovers wrecking the
planet).
没吧。许多模拟系统难以置信的忽略了太阳周期变化，不管信不信，周期变
化是变热的主因。火星也有类似变化。
-----------------------
Icarus62
Read:
Tett et al. 2000
Meehl et al. 2004
Stone et al. 2007
Lean and Rind 2008
Huber and Knutti 2011
Gillett et al. 2012
好像是很多书。
-----------------------
BrownGuy99
Rovers are solar, so no hydrocarbons are being used.
Who would have thought something so 'useless' on earth is the only means of
generating limitless energy on mars.
阳光普照，所以碳氢化合物没被用完。
谁会想到这个地球上位移没有利用起来的东西在火星上产生无限能量。
-----------------------
Sephernoose
So then who was responsible for the 5 or 6 ice ages throughout time?
Both their occurrence, and their melting back?
Also, you have some link to some report that says humans account for ALL global
warming?
那谁来负责之前五六个冰川世纪？
结冰融化？
还有，你的一些链接说全球变暖都是人类活动带来的?
---------------------------
anon173259700
Where di you read that. The Med Warming Period was global and only the rabid
CAGW sites still deny that fact.
你哪看到的，只有中国疯子还在否认地中海温暖期的事实。
-------------------------------
anon173259700
Except the Antarctic which has cooled and the rest of the planet which rose a
staggering 0.05+/-0.03 degrees in the past 16 years.
过去十六年里，除了南极洲，地球上其他地方难以置信的发生了0.05+/-0.03
度是变化。
---------------------------
absolutelyboring101
There's no abnormal melting of ice at the poles. Climate is always changing - it
always has and it always will. The alarmists see what they want to see.
两极冰川有没有异常变化。气候总有变化，过去是将来也是，杞人忧天者当
然会忧天。
---------------------------
Sephernoose
Hasn't the earth been cooling for the past 12 years?
过去12年里地球没有变冷吗？
-----------------------
absolutelyboring101
The rate of sea level rise is unchanged in 100 years.
过去100年海平面上升速度无变化。
----------------------------
DrRaeMD
Back that up with facts. Here are some: Church 2008 showed in the past ~130
years the sea levels have risen >2" Satellite altimeter readings processed at Univ
Colorado (CU Sea Level Research Group) shows the sea is rising at 3.1mm/y +/-
0.4mm in the last few. So the next 2" might be as soon as 14 years, or may take
as little as 14.
回到现实中来。有据为证：2008年Church证明过去130年海平面上升了超过
2英寸 ，CU海平面观察组通过卫星观察
发现海面每年上升3.1毫米，所以再
上升个2英寸只需要14年了。
----------------------------
absolutelyboring101
Here ya go, Doc. It helps to do a little
research.
"From this article, we learn from the
actual data that (a) sea level is generally
rising, (b) the rate of rise decelerated during the 20th century, (c) the rate of sea
level rise over the past two decades has been both positive and negative, (d) the
rate of sea level rise has been quite small over the last few years, and (e) stations
can witness an increase or decrease of sea level quite independently of one
another."
Oops, looks like I was wrong - the rate
of rise actually seems to be slowing
down.
Imagine that!!!
来看看，教授先生，这个有点小帮助
的。
从这篇文章里我们看到：1，海平面普
遍上升，2，上升速度变慢，3，过去
20年海平面上升速度有快有慢，4，过
去极年里海面上升速度已经相当小了
，5，稍微一想，海平面上升的快或者
慢好像互相没啥联系。
哎呀看来我错了，上升速度好像变慢了，想不到。
BrownGuy99
Right, because you said so.
Here's some info that proves you wrong:
After a period of approximately 2,000 years of little change (not shown here),
global average sea level rose throughout the 20th century, and the rate of change
has accelerated in recent years. 1 When averaged over all the world's oceans,
absolute sea level increased at an average rate of 0.07 inches per year from 1880
to 2011 (see Figure 1). From 1993 to 2011, however, average sea level rose at a
rate of 0.11 to 0.13 inches per year—roughly twice as fast as the long-term trend.
Relative sea level rose along much of the U.S. coastline between 1960 and 2011,
particularly the Mid-Atlantic coast and parts of the Gulf coast, where some
stations registered increases of more than 8 inches (see Figure 2). Meanwhile,
relative sea level fell at some locations in Alaska and the Pacific Northwest. At
those sites, even though absolute sea level has risen, land elevation has risen
more rapidly.
While absolute sea level has increased steadily overall, particularly in recent
decades, regional trends vary, and absolute sea level has decreased in some
places. 2 Relative sea level also has not risen uniformly because of regional and
local changes in land movement and long-term changes in coastal circulation
patterns.
好，既然你贼么说，哥就让你知道你错在哪。
（好长一段，大意是说20世纪之前的两千年里海平面没什么变化，但之后变
化很快）。
----------------------------
zeeman1
Its gone up by a millimeter in some places and down by the same amount in
others.
You win post of the day, bud.
一些地方以毫米级为单位上升，一些地方下降。你赢了，少年。
-----------------------------
BrownGuy99
Thanks for the award. I'm glad you refute my facts with empty opinion.
But either way....
"When averaged over all the world's oceans, absolute sea level increased at an
average rate of 0.07 inches per year from 1880 to 2011 (see Figure 1). From
1993 to 2011, however, average sea level rose at a rate of 0.11 to 0.13 inches
per year—roughly twice as fast as the long-term trend."
Did you miss that critical part of the sentence? Let me re-repost it:
"When averaged over all the world's oceans"
多谢，我很感谢你毫无根据的反驳我说的事实。
但是，（好吧他有图我没图，这个就算了。）
-----------------
werpor
I remember when the last glaciers melted at the end of the last 'ice' age. That
time, god blamed man. I should have listened to Noah!
我记得在上个冰川世纪冰川融化的时候，上帝怪罪于人类，我本该听诺亚的
话的。
--------------------------
BrownGuy99
i don't know what point you're trying to make, or if your post is serious or not....
but don't even think of bringing your crackpot religion into this conversation.
我不知道你向说什么，你工作重要与否，但是别把宗家那玩意扯进来。
----------------
werpor
When the ice caps melted at the end of the last ice age -- mere seconds ago in
geologic time -- the oceans rose three hundred feet. Entire civilizations were
submerged. Every culture reflects this in their 'myth' stories. Noah is the guy in the
Old Testament who supposedly built an arc.
The melting of the ice caps is fact; Noah is the myth. But the Indians here in North
America have a turtles back representing an arc.
Obviously...you do not "know" the point I was making; or understand it either.
One does not have to be the least bit religious, in order to be entirely familiar with
the Bible, or the Mahabharata for that matter. But without knowledge of the Bible
one can never understand the entire western literary canon.
I have Northrop Frye and his early influence on me for that insight. Try his
Anatomy of Criticism.
As to the ice ages and flooding etc. Periodic warming and cooling are great cycle
events...but that is common knowledge. Even the great cycle can be politicized.
I'd also suggest some some reading about the effects of volcanos on the weather
and the climate.
上个冰川世纪时代，冰川融化海面上升了三百英尺，整个世界文明被淹没，
很多文化的神话故事都反映了这个。旧约里认为诺亚建了那条船。
冰川融化是事实，诺亚是神话，但印第安人在北美有个海龟背代表船，很明
显....你”不知道“我刚才说了什么，也不理解。
-----------------------
GottaWonderSomeDays
EPA huh? Now there's a paragon of
scientific virtue. Remember DDT among
others?
环保局啊？现在他们是个有科学道德的典范。记得DDT吗？
记得DDT吗？
--------------------
Michael Cummings
Only ice melting on land will actually create a rise in sea levels, ice melting on the
ocean or water will actually drop sea levels, it's called displacement.
只有地上冰川融化才会造成海平面上升，海洋里的冰融化的话，实际上海平
面会下降，此位移也。
--------------------
Michael Cummings
When was the last time you were up there actually see this for yourself.
嘛时候你自己看过这个？
----------------------
absolutelyboring101
Thank you for your comments. You are so right.
谢谢你的观点，你可真行。
---------------
Bob1957
And sending money to Al Gore will stop this how?
那该停止给Al Gore小钱钱了？
----------------------
DSB111
I never said that.
我可没说过。
----------------------
BrownGuy99
who said anything about sending money to al gore?
谁说要送钱给Al Gore了？
----------------------
Galla Placidia
Separating natural from greenhouse warming. Begin by modelling known natural
warming - i.e. everything prior to the XXth century. Also look to find explanations
for the natural warming (solar activity, for example). Then compare with current
experience. As long as current temperatures are lower than during the Medieval
warming period or the age of the dinosaurs, I am going to be skeptical about man
-made global warming
区别温室效应，首先要模拟已知的自然变暖，也就是二十世纪之前的东西。
希望能找到对例如太阳活动之类自然变暖的解释，我开始怀疑人为全球变暖
了。
-------------------
Icarus62
Climate scientists have done exactly that and found that human activity accounts
for all of the global warming of the last half century.
气象学家已经确认，人类活动在过去的半个世纪是全球变暖的唯一因素。
------------------------
mrbuddhafreak
Actually, no they haven't.
Many of the models, unbelievably, even omit the variables caused by the cycles of
the sun, which believe it or not, is responsible for most of the heating of this
planet (and Mars, which has had similar warming, darn Rovers wrecking the
planet).
没吧。许多模拟系统难以置信的忽略了太阳周期变化，不管信不信，周期变
化是变热的主因。火星也有类似变化。
-----------------------
Icarus62
Read:
Tett et al. 2000
Meehl et al. 2004
Stone et al. 2007
Lean and Rind 2008
Huber and Knutti 2011
Gillett et al. 2012
好像是很多书。
-----------------------
BrownGuy99
Rovers are solar, so no hydrocarbons are being used.
Who would have thought something so 'useless' on earth is the only means of
generating limitless energy on mars.
阳光普照，所以碳氢化合物没被用完。
谁会想到这个地球上位移没有利用起来的东西在火星上产生无限能量。
-----------------------
Sephernoose
So then who was responsible for the 5 or 6 ice ages throughout time?
Both their occurrence, and their melting back?
Also, you have some link to some report that says humans account for ALL global
warming?
那谁来负责之前五六个冰川世纪？
结冰融化？
还有，你的一些链接说全球变暖都是人类活动带来的?
---------------------------
anon173259700
Where di you read that. The Med Warming Period was global and only the rabid
CAGW sites still deny that fact.
你哪看到的，只有中国疯子还在否认地中海温暖期的事实。
-------------------------------
anon173259700
Except the Antarctic which has cooled and the rest of the planet which rose a
staggering 0.05+/-0.03 degrees in the past 16 years.
过去十六年里，除了南极洲，地球上其他地方难以置信的发生了0.05+/-0.03
度是变化。
---------------------------
absolutelyboring101
There's no abnormal melting of ice at the poles. Climate is always changing - it
always has and it always will. The alarmists see what they want to see.
两极冰川有没有异常变化。气候总有变化，过去是将来也是，杞人忧天者当
然会忧天。
---------------------------
Sephernoose
Hasn't the earth been cooling for the past 12 years?
过去12年里地球没有变冷吗？
-----------------------
absolutelyboring101
The rate of sea level rise is unchanged in 100 years.
过去100年海平面上升速度无变化。
----------------------------
DrRaeMD
Back that up with facts. Here are some: Church 2008 showed in the past ~130
years the sea levels have risen >2" Satellite altimeter readings processed at Univ
Colorado (CU Sea Level Research Group) shows the sea is rising at 3.1mm/y +/-
0.4mm in the last few. So the next 2" might be as soon as 14 years, or may take
as little as 14.
回到现实中来。有据为证：2008年Church证明过去130年海平面上升了超过
2英寸 ，CU海平面观察组通过卫星观察
发现海面每年上升3.1毫米，所以再
上升个2英寸只需要14年了。
----------------------------
absolutelyboring101
Here ya go, Doc. It helps to do a little
research.
"From this article, we learn from the
actual data that (a) sea level is generally
rising, (b) the rate of rise decelerated during the 20th century, (c) the rate of sea
level rise over the past two decades has been both positive and negative, (d) the
rate of sea level rise has been quite small over the last few years, and (e) stations
can witness an increase or decrease of sea level quite independently of one
another."
Oops, looks like I was wrong - the rate
of rise actually seems to be slowing
down.
Imagine that!!!
来看看，教授先生，这个有点小帮助
的。
从这篇文章里我们看到：1，海平面普
遍上升，2，上升速度变慢，3，过去
20年海平面上升速度有快有慢，4，过
去极年里海面上升速度已经相当小了
，5，稍微一想，海平面上升的快或者
慢好像互相没啥联系。
哎呀看来我错了，上升速度好像变慢了，想不到。
暖个鸡吧！老子滴鸡吧都冷缩了！尿在地上10秒就结冰！
牛牛才是现当代忽悠艺术地集大成者啊，不是传言本山大叔都经常去“取精”么？这说明科学家还没把这个全球变暖问题给搞清楚。
全球变暖问题20世纪90年代最受关注，特别达成了京都协议书就是要求减少温室气体排放的。
莫非温室效应没有传说的那么厉害？
全球变暖问题20世纪90年代最受关注，特别达成了京都协议书就是要求减少温室气体排放的。
莫非温室效应没有传说的那么厉害？
以美国前副总统戈尔等人为代表的一批环保派宣传说，温室气体排放迅速增加会导致气温上升0.5-2度，全球海平面会上升1米到3米，导致马尔代夫等小国沉没水下
全球最大的温室气体排放国家是中国和美国，都没有加入京都议定书。
那大家看到的消失的冰盖去哪了？
人类还没创建大预言术，所以、那怕是＂科学＂地预言未来、结果也很难看啊。
GDI2000 发表于 2013-1-13 23:43 ![]()
全球最大的温室气体排放国家是中国和美国，都没有加入京都议定书。
中国于1998年5月签署并于2002年8月核准了该议定书。
全球最大的温室气体排放国家是中国和美国，都没有加入京都议定书。
中国于1998年5月签署并于2002年8月核准了该议定书。
那大家看到的消失的冰盖去哪了？
喝了，用了
喝了，用了
变暖就是变暖了
变冷是气候变得异常，还是变暖了
这就是神逻辑
变冷是气候变得异常，还是变暖了
这就是神逻辑
很早就认为：什么全球气候变暖是发达国家杜撰出来忽悠人的，提高富国俱乐部的门票的
我感觉是夏天更热冬天更冷了，平均下来不变？
nmd 发表于 2013-1-13 22:50 ![]()
到底还变不变暖啊？有没有确切的结论？感觉“全球变暖”似乎忽悠的成分居多。
问问澳大利亚人和阿根廷人吧……
半年后媒体上又是一片亚洲欧洲北美各地高温不退的新闻
到底还变不变暖啊？有没有确切的结论？感觉“全球变暖”似乎忽悠的成分居多。
问问澳大利亚人和阿根廷人吧……
半年后媒体上又是一片亚洲欧洲北美各地高温不退的新闻
我感觉是夏天更热冬天更冷了，平均下来不变？
极端气候增多是炒作的大热
极端气候增多是炒作的大热
需要的时候变暖
不需要的时候变冷
运用之妙存乎一心
不需要的时候变冷
运用之妙存乎一心
今天新闻，澳洲极端天气，竟然出现了52度的高温。
反正今年2012 夏天不够冷 冬天又太冷了
这样下去 农作物会减产 大饥荒会不会又要到来
这样下去 农作物会减产 大饥荒会不会又要到来
这才冻了几天就忘了热是啥样啦
砖家。尼玛温室效应他们说了算。现在不升温了还是他们说了算。
记得初中时做过课外试验研究，得出的结论是：温室效应导致全球气候变暖未必必然，比如温度异常导致洋流异常可能导致某些地方气候温度变低。
只穿短袖 发表于 2013-1-14 08:44 ![]()
我感觉是夏天更热冬天更冷了，平均下来不变？
极端天气变多了
我感觉是夏天更热冬天更冷了，平均下来不变？
极端天气变多了
应该是极端气候增多了
美国科学家不是为了解释这一现象，还搞了个北极涛动的玩意嘛
美国科学家不是为了解释这一现象，还搞了个北极涛动的玩意嘛
地球温度承周期性变化，，未必是温室气体造成的
GDI2000 发表于 2013-1-13 23:41 ![]()
这说明科学家还没把这个全球变暖问题给搞清楚。
全球变暖问题20世纪90年代最受关注，特别达成了京都协议书 ...
当年关于全球变暖理论提出者的私人电邮泄漏证实：为了证明全球变暖，英国等的气象学者故意造假编数据来证明气候因所谓温室气体而变暖。
这说明科学家还没把这个全球变暖问题给搞清楚。
全球变暖问题20世纪90年代最受关注，特别达成了京都协议书 ...
当年关于全球变暖理论提出者的私人电邮泄漏证实：为了证明全球变暖，英国等的气象学者故意造假编数据来证明气候因所谓温室气体而变暖。
九旒云罕 发表于 2013-1-14 07:38 ![]()
很早就认为：什么全球气候变暖是发达国家杜撰出来忽悠人的，提高富国俱乐部的门票的
现在发达国家有一种思潮，即对工业化持根本性的反对态度，环境保护不以人类发展为目的，而是以回归原始的无人类环境为目的，因此，反对大坝，反对工业，反对一切的一切，只为一个目的：没有人类的的自然界多么美好呀！
很早就认为：什么全球气候变暖是发达国家杜撰出来忽悠人的，提高富国俱乐部的门票的
现在发达国家有一种思潮，即对工业化持根本性的反对态度，环境保护不以人类发展为目的，而是以回归原始的无人类环境为目的，因此，反对大坝，反对工业，反对一切的一切，只为一个目的：没有人类的的自然界多么美好呀！
梦想去飞翔 发表于 2013-1-15 10:47 ![]()
当年关于全球变暖理论提出者的私人电邮泄漏证实：为了证明全球变暖，英国等的气象学者故意造假编数据来证 ...
那件事情已经辟谣了，没有一家权威学术机构认为数据是编造的。
当然跟阴谋论者说什么都没用，夏天再看吧。
当年关于全球变暖理论提出者的私人电邮泄漏证实：为了证明全球变暖，英国等的气象学者故意造假编数据来证 ...
那件事情已经辟谣了，没有一家权威学术机构认为数据是编造的。
当然跟阴谋论者说什么都没用，夏天再看吧。
全球变冷来自: Android客户端